Re: Blade Vs Sp1
 

I think the 30KG's is a little OTT. The claimed dry weight of 168kg on a 954 imo is most likely utter rubbish. Especially when the R6's curb weight is 198kg inc fuel. 17L being about 12KG's, making a dry weight of about 185kg's...

Not that there is much point arguing about weight as on a well set up bike it wont make that much odd's on the road.

I'd agree with this. Its pretty hard to say either way. All down to what each like I suppose.

Re: Blade Vs Sp1
 

at the end of the day its academic they are both great looking quick bikes who gives a stuff which is fastest? in the real world most would take the blade as its the better all rounder. and the motors a peach.

Re: Blade Vs Sp1
 

Even though they're both h*ndas I reckon both would be rapid enough. Basically the only thing able to leave you behind if totally committed to stupidity would be an equally committed rider on a GSXR of course...

Or perhaps there would be no incentive to get the bike in the right gear because of this.

If you keep any motor on the boil, you don't get that scary rush of power because you're already in the power and hence only get the power you ask for with the throttle.

Have a look at the power curve of the highly tuned V twins of the time, RC51, TLR etc. They're pretty comparable to IL4 power delivery anyway, rather than the huge bottom end of the milder tuned ones like the TLS.
It's not like big IL4s are short of torque.

I reckon the bl*de would have it.

Re: Blade Vs Sp1
 

But this comes back to the rider i.e a twin has to be ridden differently to a 4. There is no rule which say you must exit the corner at 7k rpm.

The blade has a bigger top end, but depending on where you ride it, it may not matter. If we say ran the test at somewhere like Brands Indy, I doubt outright power would make a huge difference. Here in NZ club racing, they have 750s and 1L competing in the same class! I know that it isn't quite the same because the 750 is lighter, but just to illustarate that the 20 extra hp isn't the end of the discussion.

That said, I still think the blade would win, but I think it would be pretty close.

Re: Blade Vs Sp1
 

A well designed litre 4 will always produce more power than a well designed litre twin as it will have more available valve area, so can get more air/fuel in.

Yes, it is awful. The suspension is far too hard, the radiators cook you and the fueling is poor. Add to that the massive fuel consumption, tiny tank and distressing comfort levels that you expect with a race bike you have a huge compromise for a road bike. The Blade on pretty much any road would be faster and much much easier to ride. The SP1 might be quicker on a smooth track but I'd still be on the Blade.

MT

Re: Blade Vs Sp1
 

I have.

See here: http://forums.sv650.org/showthread.p...ighlight=blade

Re: Blade Vs Sp1
 

Yeah it will. Weight is inversely proportional to acceleration. It also has the same effect on the deceleration, ie you can brake quicker on a lighter bike.

Much as I love twins, this is true. Quite simply a superior engine design if peak power is your goal.

Re: Blade Vs Sp1
 

sp1 for the chassis, but the fireblade engine is the better (as standard)

Re: Blade Vs Sp1
 

Indeed... Though the 999R wasen't that far off tbh. Massive bore tiny stroke and a true 140bhp at the wheel on the road. Not that far behind the 150-160 of the IL4's.

I didnt say it wouldn't be noticed, I said it wouldn't make much odd's. Look at Motogp for instance, Pedro vs any othere rider... many KG's in it, but not much of a help quite often.

Re: Blade Vs Sp1
 

Do you stop at every corner :confused: very odd